I thought this video from Digital Foundry was very informatiive for people who wonder about the benefits of MS BC for 360 and OG Xbox games. It seems MS is really putting in a lot of work on their emulator and it also seems they have also baked in hardware within the X1 platform to support BC. It looks like this was not just a reaction from MS to combat Sony but instead a planned design from the inception of the X1 hardware.

It can't be pure emulation...if it was all games would be compatible. All so called backwards compatible games, 360 or original XBox, need to be recoded to certain aspects to be able to work on the X1 with the added benefits.

It can't be pure emulation...if it was all games would be compatible. All so called backwards compatible games, 360 or original XBox, need to be recoded to certain aspects to be able to work on the X1 with the added benefits.

Not sure if you actually watched the video but its stated that the games are not recoded at all and the original game code is not touched.

It can't be pure emulation...if it was all games would be compatible. All so called backwards compatible games, 360 or original XBox, need to be recoded to certain aspects to be able to work on the X1 with the added benefits.

Not sure if you actually watched the video but its stated that the games are not recoded at all and the original game code is not touched.

I know what DF say (who have been on MS's pay roll lately anyway) but I also know what my mind tells me. They definitely have to add code hence why I said "certain aspects". Otherwise all games would just work, if it was a fully working emulator which wouldn't need individual adaption.

It's basically what DF is stating and which is very interesting, that the actual adaption is done on the "emulation" level, not on the level of the original software, if that's 100% true or not.

DonFerrari said:As far as I'm concerned it's much more of a port than emulation... it not only improves several aspects of the IQ, but it also is restricted to selected games and also face licensing rights.

Backward compatibility is neither a porting nor an emulation operation.

Anyone with enough knowledge about microprocesors roughly knows how it is done, and it has been explained already, long before DF figured out that they should write an article about it (an article which doesn't really tell us anything not already known).

And don't ask me to write an article about it, I'm way too lazy around these times.

DonFerrari said:As far as I'm concerned it's much more of a port than emulation... it not only improves several aspects of the IQ, but it also is restricted to selected games and also face licensing rights.

Backward compatibility is neither a porting nor an emulation operation.

Anyone with enough knowledge about microprocesors roughly knows how it is done, and it has been explained already, long before DF figured out that they should write an article about it (an article which doesn't really tell us anything not already known).

And don't ask me to write an article about it, I'm way too lazy around these times.

The X1 is NOT using the original data on disk. It is necessary to download the adapted code digitally. So he is basically right...it's not true backwards compatibility as every old game can't just be played...it's something else as games have to be adapted and licensed to work on it.

So enlighten us how PowerPC code can be transferred to X86 architecture without basically using some form of enhanced emulation?! (just like DF have stated in this video)

DonFerrari said:As far as I'm concerned it's much more of a port than emulation... it not only improves several aspects of the IQ, but it also is restricted to selected games and also face licensing rights.

Backward compatibility is neither a porting nor an emulation operation.

Anyone with enough knowledge about microprocesors roughly knows how it is done, and it has been explained already, long before DF figured out that they should write an article about it (an article which doesn't really tell us anything not already known).

And don't ask me to write an article about it, I'm way too lazy around these times.

Ok if you say so....

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

It's what Apple used to run PowerPC apps on Intel Macs. Apple just licensed it too so MS could have as well. The PowerMac G5 also used the same exact architecture that the Xbox 360 did (both based on the PPC 970).

The only thing I am not sure of is if the One's CPU is strong enough to handle PowerPC games. From what I read, Rosetta was great at emulating things like Office and Photoshop but had problems with programs like Final Cut Pro and games (both of them lol), but I never got a confirmation (I went from an iMac G4 to iMac Intel).

Either that, or do something like what Sega did with the Genesis being backwards compatible. Basically have the CPU sold separately then you just connect it to the I/O in the back and the One emulates the 360 GPU and you get native B.C. Microsoft could then sell it for like $49-$59.

Currently Playing:

DonFerrari said:As far as I'm concerned it's much more of a port than emulation... it not only improves several aspects of the IQ, but it also is restricted to selected games and also face licensing rights.

Backward compatibility is neither a porting nor an emulation operation.

Anyone with enough knowledge about microprocesors roughly knows how it is done, and it has been explained already, long before DF figured out that they should write an article about it (an article which doesn't really tell us anything not already known).

And don't ask me to write an article about it, I'm way too lazy around these times.

This is a bad post, and you should feel bad.

"I know more than you do but I'm not gonna explain it because I'm lazy kthxbye".